Commentary: Zapman on the Microsoft witch trial 10-30-98

CBS.MarketWatch.com

Editor's note: Last week's debate between NouveauGeek (aka: Microsoft critic Rebecca Lynn Eisenberg) and Zapman drew such a big response from our readers that we arranged a re-match. This time, Zapman goes first, and NouveauGeek gets the last word. Also see their earlier comments in Noveau Geek and Zapman, and see what readers said in Microsoft Letters

SALEM, Mass. (CBS.MW) -- Let's just get it over with and move the Microsoft trial to Salem, where they really know how to grill a stake.

When Microsoft's attorney argued early in the trial that the government was trying to "demonize" Bill Gates, I thought he was just being melodramatic. I didn't know then there was actual evidence that AOL Chairman Steve Case had denounced Gates as "the Beast of Redmond" while plotting with Netscape CEO Jim Barksdale on how to "use our unique respective strengths to go kick the shit out of" Microsoft (MSFT)
MSFT, +1.57%
. He said that, really!

But I'm getting ahead of myself.First, I want to thank our readers -- on both sides -- for their spirited letters. They showed a lot of common sense, which is something that has been missing in this case.

Now, let's take a look at some of the key evidence, and I think you'll see why I'm starting to believe this case has more to do with pandering to public calls for blood than with the all-important goal of enforcing the nation's antitrust laws.

For the record

10/21:It turns out Netscape Chairman Jim Clark approached Bill Gates and asked Gates to buy a piece of Netscape, saying "we never meant to compete with you." In other words, Netscape (NSCP)
nscp
set up a company that dominated the browser market, then tried to collude with Microsoft to own that market outright. And Microsoft refused, saying competition is a good thing. And now Microsoft is on trial for trying to restrict competition!? Oh, please!

10/26: When Microsoft and Netscape finally get together to talk about a possible alliance, Netscape wunderkind Marc Andreessen took extremely detailed notes. Immediately after the meeting, Andreessen sent the notes to Netscape's lawyer. And the very next day, the Justice Department just happens to ask the lawyer for any notes he has that shows Microsoft is competing unfairly. The government and Netscape call it a coincidence. But Zapman smells a rat. Can you say "set up?"

10/27:Apple CFO Fred Anderson is quoted as saying Apple agreed to put Microsoft's browser in its computers because "Apple needed to ensure that Microsoft would continue to provide MS Office for Mac or we were dead." This is revisionist history, clear and simple.

Apple (AAPL)
AAPL, +1.63%
honcho Steve Jobs characterized that deal a little differently when he trumpeted the Microsoft-Apple alliance at MacWorld. In that version, Microsoft was saving Apple's skin by investing $150 million in the struggling company -- cash that was later used to finance development of the Apple iMac, among other things. The investment represents about what Apple spends on R&D in two quarters. And both Gates and Jobs said at the time that Microsoft wanted to continue making software for the Mac because it held a respectable 5 percent of the market -- hardly something that a greedy Microsoft would pass up. In any case, Microsoft's investment in Apple sent Apple shares soaring the next couple of days. That's a peculiar way to strangle competitors! Oh, by the way, I also recall Jobs saying that alliance was his idea -- not Microsoft's.

10/28:This is my favorite. AOL's Steve Case exchanges a series of e-mails with Netscape's Barksdale, plotting the demise of "The Beast of Redmond," then makes a pact with the devil himself when Microsoft offers to put AOL (AOL)
aol
onto every new computer carrying Windows 95. Remember, Netscape at the time dominated the market for Internet browsers and AOL is the world's largest online service. And they were conspiring to -- as Case put it in one note -- "use our unique respective strengths to go kick the shit out of the Beast of Redmond." That is exactly the kind of unfair business practice that antitrust laws are designed to prevent. We've simply got the wrong company on trial!

Basta!

So Netscape first tried to collude with Microsoft. And when that failed, it tried to collude with AOL against Microsoft. And when that failed, it teamed up with Big Brother and screams: unfair business practices. As for AOL, well, it's clear Steve Case played both sides of the street against the middle -- and won big time. So why's AOL crying foul?

I can't wait to see the next piece of evidence against Bill Gates. With any luck, he could be nominated for sainthood before this witch trial is over.

Intraday Data provided by SIX Financial Information and subject to terms of use.
Historical and current end-of-day data provided by SIX Financial Information. Intraday data
delayed per exchange requirements. S&P/Dow Jones Indices (SM) from Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
All quotes are in local exchange time. Real time last sale data provided by NASDAQ. More
information on NASDAQ traded symbols and their current financial status. Intraday
data delayed 15 minutes for Nasdaq, and 20 minutes for other exchanges. S&P/Dow Jones Indices (SM)
from Dow Jones & Company, Inc. SEHK intraday data is provided by SIX Financial Information and is
at least 60-minutes delayed. All quotes are in local exchange time.